webrunner5

Where I live here in Ohio all the big city TV stations use small camcorders, mostly Sony ones, and some of the reporters are using a smartphone for quick updates. So the higher end 4 to 7 thousand dollar camcorders are no slouch these days.

Trouble with the EF-RF ND option is you have to use EF lenses and they are huge compared to mirrorless lenses. Not really into a 5 pound lens anymore. Sony is really good at making small light mirrorless lenses. My EF 24-105mm Canon seems twice as heavy as my FE 24-105mm Sony. On my 1DC it is stupid heavy total weight wise.

Well, I will concede that a person that is 7 foot tall probably should NOT use a shoulder mounted camcorder!

I still believe the move away from Camcorders was sort of a bad idea for video. Sure, for photos I can see it.

I F ing hate the look of Gimbals. They look like shit. Oh look I am flying! Same with motorized slides, god, people overused the shit out of them also. A Steady Cam well yeah, not a damn gimbal. Drones, well they have a small sensor in them. And if you are not great you can look like a drunken sailor flying one. Drones do give a unique look, but it gets old quick for all the wobbles and jitters.

Sure, there is noise, but the colors hold up well and I like the look of all of the shots. Seems like a pretty dope camera.

Well to me other than the Ursa Mini most of these new cameras have missed the boat. Real ENG cameras have zero stabilization in the body or the lens, yet you never see any goofy bad movement from them because they weigh a lot, and they are up on your shoulder. Like I have said you can use them for hours on you shoulder and never get tired or shaky. I have no clue why when you buy a camera that is geared toward film making these company's trying to make the littlest, lightest camera they can make that fits in your hand then you have to rig the living shit out of a camera and they still suck is beyond me.

This is a great nonbiased review of a few cameras. Go to 27:00 minutes if you want to see the winner for filming.

It is a better form factor than a Red. A little box with a monitor on top is not my idea of ideal. It is a baby ENG camera, and they are Really comfortable to use for hours at a time.

Pretty interesting match of different company's grip.

Everyone has their likes and not likes when it comes to shooting, grading. The Very first thing I look for is detail in the shadows. I find the little details hidden in the shadows Way more enticing than super cloud detail etc. So, no I Don't ETTR at all in video, not a lot of times using photos either. I grew up using B&W and you Had to have perfect exposure to make that pop. But film has a Lot of DR so easier than I guess. I just don't think in video most cameras have enough DR to stretch the highlights and have much meat left at the bottom. Just a thought.

The one on the far left is what a X-RITE chart should look like I think. But I probably would prefer the one on the far right lol.

I think most people on here, including me, would sacrifice the darker areas for the highlights. YOU have to determine what is your priority in each scene. What makes you happy is what counts. It is your footage. Sure, if you are in a studio you can add or subtract lighting but out in the wild it is rarely a perfect scenario for a great exposure. That is why video is so damn hard to do well.

Yeah, but when I look at a scene and the blacks are suppressed I think either the camera is shit for DR or the guy or girl shooting it doesn't know what he she is doing. Even a blue sky has dark areas in it if it has clouds. I can see erroring toward the bright area but that is a sketchy approach. Plus like you said that may be for only a few frames than what?

From my experience ETTR Only works for photography not video. YMMV. For video you have to think 0 to 100, and you Have to stay in between those values. You are screwed if you go above or below those figures. You really can't be near the limit at either value to be honest. You would have to have 18 stops or more to use it all.

I was going to say just buy a Sony Alpha camera but didn't lol. Even the original Canon R would be ok. I get the idea of DNG files. You make it happen not the camera. Cameras that do that are great as a learning tool. Not so great for getting what you want on a daily basis. I would not mind having one to be honest. But I can think of a Lot of "better" cameras for my use than it for the same or near money. I am tired of spending my time going somewhere, long drive to get some footage and it is crap when you look at it back home. Wow not a good way to spend your time. But I guess if you shoot Raw you can fix a lot of F ups. I guess I have been there done that too many times to consider it to be honest. We have come to a point in time where most newer cameras now are a Lot smarter than we are.

This camera to me sounds like it is more of a pain in the ass to use than it is worth. The OG BMPCC is sort of like that also. Sure, when it works it is great, when it doesn't you end up with shit footage. Why the hell bother. There are too many cameras out now that you just pick up and shoot and bingo, 90% of what you wanted. One and done as they say. And then you still have to add stuff onto it to make it somewhat useable, I just don't get it. You have to be a gluten for punishment to use this camera, sort of the same for the EOS-M using ML. Hit or miss, mostly miss.

The United States is getting worse by the day about people using "real" cameras. I Never feel comfortable using one in public anymore. You stand out like a sore thumb now. This country has never been too keen on poking a camera in someone's face. The USA has really never been a tourist destination like say Europe is. And people here have had the money to buy top end phones for years so there is very few normal cameras here now. Plus, I got my Xperia brand new in a box for $1100.00. Still expensive but not much worse than say a new iPhone or Samsung. And yeah it is not using the whole senor, using 60% of it, and the pixels are larger so better low light and Bokeh ability due to the size. It is a better phone than a lot of people think.

That one looks great. I think you have got it figured out.

This new Sony Xperia Pro-I I just bought is Crazy good. I will get some shots up; the weather has been terrible here last few days. This smartphone is a camera first and a phone second. Amazing tech in it. A Sony RX00 VII in your pocket almost.

That looks pretty close to reality I think, maybe a Little bit on the lighter side but I think that is the best so far. But keep in mind I think everyone sees color a bit different and some people are just plain color blind. They say women see color different than men do. They distinguish pastels better for one thing. Sure aren't going to argue with them that is for sure.

Really looks great. But as we can see it really depends a lot on who you have grading the footage and their skill level.